Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 10:04:55 -0500 From: Bill Vermillion <bill@bilver.wjv.com> To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 2 cisco's and a fbsd box running bgp Message-ID: <20010103100455.A55167@wjv.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0101031635450.23776-100000@calulu.shearer.org>; from dan@tellurian.com.au on Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 04:46:51PM %2B1030 References: <3A52C152.A75D1882@quake.com.au> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0101031635450.23776-100000@calulu.shearer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 04:46:51PM +1030, Dan Shearer thus spoke: > On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Kal Torak wrote: > > Nope you will just have to take my word for it :P > Well, this is what I'm trying to get at. In fact I have used > free software to do routing before, and would do so again in the > right circumstances, just as I happily use Ciscos in the right > circumstances (and I'm no routing guru, far from it. But I know > when something works and when it doesn't :-) > But I'm looking for a really good answer to give to people who > snort "Oh but nothing but a Cisco can reliably route packets at > ethernet speeds in a BPG/OSPF environment". Well that counters to what I've heard which is usually "Cisco builds good reliable equipment, that is overpriced, but you are paying for their technical support which is good". And that statement is often followed up by "If you want really fast devices then go with Foundry Networks devices". I don't need anything that fast yet, hopefully I will someday. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010103100455.A55167>